Battle Dress

[kristof65]

If I knew it was Imperial Marines, they would not have fired that first shot because we would have surrendered before the airlock door was opened.

That's you or I.

Unless you're a military force, you don't mess with Imperial Marines. They really are that dangerous.

But do you realize how many stupid people there have to be in the 3rd Imperium? Earth has plenty of them among it's 6 billion residents, with the combined population of the 3rd Imperium, there must be trillions of them out there. I'm sure someone somewhere would mess with them, and end up as a story the marines tell in the galley and laugh about.

I ran an adventure once where the PCs (with light armour and Guass pistols) were blocked by a squad in Battle Dress and FGMPs while sneaking through a warzone for nefarious purposes. They weren't trapped, the Marine's weren't coming after them, they just obviously weren't getting by the Marines via that route - they were going to have to find a different route. One of the player's decided I wouldn't kill his PC, and started a fire fight with the Marines. He and another PC stepped out into the street, and were both killed by the same FGMP blast.

The player's who's characters got killed both got pissed off at me that I had the audacity to kill their PCs and stormed out. The other players, OTOH, saw no problem with what had happened, and were in fact laughing their arses off about the stupidity of the other players. I mean, come on, who steps out and take's pot shots at fully armored and armed marines with light armor and a Guass Pistol?

 

[Maedhros]

Come on, an PGMP in boarding is like an MG42/59 in House2House. Heavy, cumbersome, loud and VERY EFFECTIVE.

Thing is, plasma is hot. REALLY HOT. Hot enough to vaporize metal, such as that which forms conduits, bulkheads and corridor walls. Looking at most of the ship designs, behind many corridor walls lie liquid hydrogen fuel storage tanks. Liquid hydrogen reacts very poorly to superheated vaporized metal, especially in the presence of oxygen. Dramatic hypothermic reactions with large delta-Vs tend to occur, which have a notably deleterious effect on the occupants of the starship (armor-clad or no).

All it takes is one errant shot, and entire ship go BOOM!

 

[kristof65]

All it takes is one errant shot, and entire ship go BOOM!

And that's bad, why? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

[Supergamera]

I mean, come on, who steps out and take's pot shots at fully armored and armed marines with light armor and a Guass Pistol?

Han Solo, with blaster and no armor, vs. Stormtroopers. Maybe your players were thinking in a more cinematic fashion? Star Wars ruined the reputation of armored space soldiers everywhere.

 

[Pyromancer]

I mean, come on, who steps out and take's pot shots at fully armored and armed marines with light armor and a Guass Pistol?

Han Solo, with blaster and no armor, vs. Stormtroopers.

But... but the Stormtroopers only wore Combat Armor, not Battle Dress!

 

[GypsyComet]

...and a blaster, even a little one, is not "just a pistol". Of course, Han is getting wicked Effect Roll bonuses on his shots, while those likely FOB Stormtroopers are Energy Rifle-1 at most with weapons that have innacuracy as a feature instead of a bug.

 

[kristof65]

I mean, come on, who steps out and take's pot shots at fully armored and armed marines with light armor and a Guass Pistol?

Han Solo, with blaster and no armor, vs. Stormtroopers. Maybe your players were thinking in a more cinematic fashion? Star Wars ruined the reputation of armored space soldiers everywhere.

Ahh, but at least Han Solo had a weapon similar in capability to what the stormtrooper's used. Plus, if I recall my SW history right, he was an ex-stormtrooper himself, which means he knew exactly what he was up against.

I get your point about what the players may have been thinking, but in my defense, I had previously demonstrated the defensive power of BD and the offensive power of an FGMP to the players. At least well enough that 4 out of 6 of them understood it wasn't a fight they could win. And I wasn't heartless or cruel about it, either. I asked "Are you sure?" several times before the dice were rolled.

In the end, it was a very humerous situation that is still funny for my friends and I to talk about - both in game and out of game.

 

[GypsyComet]

Ahh, but at least Han Solo had a weapon similar in capability to what the stormtrooper's used. Plus, if I recall my SW history right, he was an ex-stormtrooper himself, which means he knew exactly what he was up against.

He knew, but from the point of view of an Imperial Naval Academy graduate*, not as a stormtrooper.

(* been a while and probably re-written a few times, so I'm not sure if he skipped out with Chewbacca just before or just after graduation.)

 

[Shiloh]

All it takes is one errant shot, and entire ship go BOOM!

And that's bad, why? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Cos if that's the end result you wanted, there was no need to board and put yourself at ground (space?) zero of the detonation. You could've just kept zapping away with whatever ranged weapon put you in a position to board.

 

[opensent]

The whole point of battledress technology is that it can go where infantry can go. This generally includes starship corridors.

 

[opensent]

Also, if boarders were wearing Battle Dress they would be doing so primarily to use PGMP or FGMP - otherwise, simple Combat Armour would work just as well. Anyone firing a PGMP or FGMP on board a space ship is inviting disaster; those heavy weapons are clearly for planetary assault. So there really is no impetus for using Battle Dress during boarding actions.

If you have never played Classic Traveller, you might think this. Here's why it is not true in the OTU.

In CT, the average STR is 7. Having an 11 STR gives you a +2 DM when using a cutlass.

Combat armor and battledress provide the same armor in CT. But if you take two marines with average stats 777777, the BD marine will make short work of the combat armored marine, because the battle dress is doubling his STR to 14, giving him the +2 DM (which is amazingly powerful in a 2d6, target number is 8+ system). In addition, after 7 cutlass attacks, your combat armor marine will be fatigued, while the BD marine enjoys unlimited endurance.

Battledress is extremely useful when combined with melee boarding actions. Make no mistake about it.

Just because you can use FGMP/PGMP with battledress, doesn’t mean it is the only way to employ it. There is a clear value to using battle dress with melee troops, in Classic Traveller and now Mongoose Traveller..

 

[Ishmael]

iirc, the original point of battledress was to be a support weapons platform. High energy weapons could not be used at all unless the firer wore battledress and even then, only if the firer was in one of a few prescribed firing stances which would allow the suit's augmentation to handle the recoil.
Supposedly, grav tech 'fixes' all that, but then Trav Grav tech is a pet peeve of mine since it unbalances the game ( imho by making almost anything possible; its the biggest space opera gimmick in the game ) and makes having airplanes,sea ships, trains and helicopters hard to justify...and I like those.

As I've mentioned earlier, in order to get the armor ratings that BD enjoys makes it relatively massive. Based on Striker, and the area that would have to be covered on a body and using ESD, the armor alone would mass a good amount ....far more than could be carried without augmentation. Combat armor would be more than a soldier could carry were it to give the same protection as BD. If that were not true, then the marines and army would be clamouring to use the same armor on their tanks/ships on account that it is so much more effective than what they have to use.

as always..this is IMTU
The heaviness of BD would also make it less dexterous due to momentum issues; a tack hammer is easier and more controllable than a 9 lb sledge for a given strength.

btw..based on striker rules..a tech 6 6cm HEAT rifle grenade can take BD out.
I imagine an insurgency group using IED's could be a real headache for them.
anti-personnel SEFOP mine anyone?

 

[opensent]

Why not mount the support weapon on a vehicle, like people have been doing since TL-2 or so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ballista-quadrirotis.jpeg

Or give it a bipod or tripod and go prone like we do at TL-6-7? The reason this guy doesn't fire it from standing is recoil.

http://www.murdoconline.net/2007/polish_heavy_sniper_rifle-thumb.jpg

No; Battledress is about mobility, not recoil compensation. Recoil compensation can be addressed in other ways. Having a small Marine detachment skill everyone onboard an enemy ship using only their cutlasses is what Battledress is all about.

PS: Battle Dress (and the Cutlass) was introduced in Book 1 of Classic Traveller. FGMP/PGMP was introduced in Book 4. Not a strong argument for the support weapons case.

 

[Ishmael]

PS: Battle Dress (and the Cutlass) was introduced in Book 1 of Classic Traveller. FGMP/PGMP was introduced in Book 4. Not a strong argument for the support weapons case.

no?...I had book 1 and book 4 a long time ago..... in book 4, it described the entire "HE weapon only from BD becasue of recoil" issue. Also, in Megatraveller, pgmp-12,pgmp-13 and fgmp-14 requires battledress skill before the weapon can be fired will any skill at all. The other high-energy weapons don't require battledress because of magi-tech grav compensation.

Without the heavy/hi-recoil infantry support weapons, why bother with powered exoskeletons/augmentation when cheaper and, "don't need special training to use", combat armor, that can give the same protection and communications, is available?

btw...mounting a weapon on a vehicle or a bipod/tripod does not mean that recoil issues go away although it does help. The front of the m551 Sheridan tank actually flipped upwards suprisingly high when it fired its gun ( not the sheleleigh missle though ).

 

[opensent]

And which do you think was published first? Book 1, or Book 4?

It's a non sequitur to argue that the wording in book 4 (copyright 1978) justifies the existences of the battledress in book 1 (copyright 1977).

Just because the high energy weapons need battle dress does not mean that battle dress exists to support high energy weapons.

Battledress in CT book 1 only required Vacc Suit-1 to use, which is the same skill and skill level required in book 1 to use Combat Armor. So I reject your entire 'special training' premise.

From day 1, battledress has been part of the Traveller universe. The same can not/not be said of the FGMP/PGMP. Clearly the game designers thought it was worth 'bothering' with, even without heavy/hi-energy weapons, thus it's inclusion in book 1.

 

[Ishmael]

And which do you think was published first? Book 1, or Book 4?

It's a non sequitur to argue that the wording in book 4 (copyright 1978) justifies the existences of the battledress in book 1 (copyright 1977).

Just because the high energy weapons need battle dress does not mean that battle dress exists to support high energy weapons.

The order in which the books were presented is unimportant to my argument. In any case. Book 4 existed to expand upon and detail certain aspects of earlier works. It is considered CT canon and OTU.

I never said hi-energy weapons justify battledress, but my feelings are the exact opposite; battledress justifies fusion/plasma guns. Without the strength enhancement of BD, heavy/hi-recoil weapons man-portable weapons would not exist in such forms. Prior to BD, infantry support weapons were either lightwieght, carried/fired by a crew and/or low recoil. LMG's, Recoiless rifles and Dragon launchers come to mind.
Given the link given between hi-energy weapons and BD, it seems natural to me ( and IMTU ) to use BD to carry infantry support weapons due to their strength and endurance. Other Infantry support weapons might be a 20mm rifle, a man-portable chain-gun ( or gatling gun ), or some form of missile launcher.

Battledress in CT book 1 only required Vacc Suit-1 to use, which is the same skill and skill level required in book 1 to use Combat Armor. So I reject your entire 'special training' premise.

Reject it if you like. However, special training does exist in the MT ruleset. Battledress skill includes vacc suit, but vacc suit does not include Battledress. As Megatraveller is the ruleset I prefer and have for reference, that's what I choose to base my arguments on. In MT, battledress is a skill that is available only for specific careers ( marines,army,sailor and pirate for basic chargen... add a slight chance to get it in the Navy for advanced chargen ).

I reject your view that "Having a small Marine detachment skill everyone onboard an enemy ship using only their cutlasses is what Battledress is all about. "
There's just too many weapons that can take out BD before it can close to melee range ( based on MT, Striker, and AHL ) to make that plausible to me.
Also, if you go with an "energy per unit area proportional to penetration/damage", then you'd see that melee weapons are horribly over-rated for damage. They should have lower penetration.

but then again, ytu<>mtu
which is good, eh?

 

[opensent]

Again, during shipboard engagment, most combat will occur within melee range. This is where battledress, sans high energy weapons (due to overpentration issues), will shine.

I'm not saying the boarding troops won't have laser rifles, carbines, snub pistols, etc. in addition to cutlasses. What I'm saying is that battledress will be deployed, FGMPs/PGMPs will not, specifically because battledress has the mobility required to engage enemy personnel onboard the target vessel during a boarding operation.

 

[opensent]

Actually I have my doubts about the Cutlass. Between armor and automatic weapons, including grenade launchers capabel off killing the BD I doubt hand2hand will occure. Boarding action will be similar to MOUT/FIBUA with lots of grenades and automatic fire and actually the occasional burst from a FGMP to kill a barricade

Tell me what fuel starships use again?

There's no way high energy weapons are being deployed duing boarding actions, even if the risk of breaching the fuel storage is only 1-2% (and it's much higher IMHO). You are talking about blowing up the target vessel, everyone on board, killing yourself and all your men, and destroying your attached boarding craft.

Theres a reason you didn't just blow the ship up to begin with: hostages, valuable cargo, need for prisoners/intelligence, etc. Epic PGMP fail isn't going to get you any of those.

While perhaps no one cares if a few stupid Imperial Marines kill themselves, you can be sure that someone will answer for the loss of a 28 million Cr Cutter (or similar small craft). Infantry/Marines are ultimately more expendable and can accomplish the same job with small arms and melee weapons without the risk.

It's the same reason people are droping 3 million dollars off to Somali pirates right now instead of sending in Seal Team Six. No one wants to risk the loss of the ship, however small the probablity of that is.

Sending a boarding party is dangerous enough, you aren't going to increase the risk by using high energy weapons.

 

[Ishmael]

I have to agree with BenGunn on this.
I would think an assault on a functioning ship would be suicide. The interior of a ship that is the target of a combat boarding action would most likely be vacuum and 0g and lit only by emergency lighting.

Hydrogen fuel won't explode in a vacuum.... unless it fuses ( as far as I know )

Now a firefight breaking out after troops have come aboard peacefully or by infiltration is slightly different, right? ( grav,lights,air). I'll check, but I think that's what all the scenarios in AHL involve..no ship-2-ship boarding actions under fire.

imtu, starships are fueled with ammonia. Ammonia has nearly twice the hydrogen as the same volume of liquid H2 ( 1.7 times actually ). It came be burned in IC engines and used in fuel cells, too. The nitrogen can be used for cooling systems and reaction mass.
I know its toxic and all, but we already use it so wide on earth today that I will assume humans will be able to handle it as easily as we handle gasoline eventually...common, but dangerous and can bite you in the ass if you get too careless around it.
-----------------------------------------

I think I'm going to have to study fg/pg's to see exactly what they are like ( muzzle energies, recoil,etc. )
I wonder if putting a lase rod into each cartridge ( ffs1) for a fgmp would make it act like a nuke pumped laser on a tiny scale and thus act like a 'plaser' from 2300.

 

[opensent]

And if you accidently shoot through to a compartment that still has atmo and fuel, then what? Compartmentalization, eh?

Even a warship with no fuel and no atmosphere has ammo stores, missiles loaded in various tubes, O2 storage, etc.

Again, why take the risk. A Navy Engineering rating with a cutting torch can perform a controlled bulkhead breach anywhere on the ship. It's much safer than firing HE weapons that over penetrate.

If the ship is in the condition you describe (no fuel, effectively adrift), then you can pick the locations you enter from. You control the fight. Simply flank the strongpoints and cut/shoot your way through the defenders.